Disclaimer: I'm not a journalist. I don't have any training as a journalist. I know a few journalists. But I am a consumer of journalism.

The blogosphere is abuzz this month with the stunning work of journalist Michael Hastings of the Rolling Stone, and how his article (The Runaway General) led to the public resignation of General McChrystal.

Some so-called "mainstream journalists" are slamming Mr. Hastings for his piece, others are defending him. Realizing that no one asked me my opinion, I'm going to give it anyway.

The resignation of General McChrystal was absolutely necessary and appropriate. He fucked up. Publicly. So he did the honorable thing and tendered his resignation.

President Obama's acceptance of General McChrytal's resignation was absolutely necessary and appropriate. Maintaining civilian control over the military is essential, and General McChrystal's comments gave the President no other choice.

Michael Hastings' publication of this story was absolutely necessary and appropriate. The job of reporters isn't to suck up to the administration, or the Pentagon, or anyone. Their job is to investigate and report the news. Period.

I don't understand why some people thought that Hastings owed the Pentagon more discretion, or an easier treatment of the General's behavior, or some sort of loyalty of any kind. Hastings' job is to report the news. His job isn't to make public figures look good, or to ensure no negative impressions are ever communicated to the public, or to be the Pentagon's BFF. General McChrytal's behavior (and that of his staff, but for the purposes of Command, it's really the same thing) was not only unacceptable, but punishable under the UCMJ. And some people think he should have just sat on it? Really? Why? So that insubordination and disrespect could find their way throughout the chain of command unhindered? So that a more "famous" or "mainstream" journalist could break the story?

I don't think so.

"Whoever envies another confesses his superiority." ~Samuel Johnson, The Rambler.

Consider, Ms. Logan: Just because you didn't break the story doesn't mean the story doesn't have value. Get over yourself, you and the rest of the hypocritical douchebags who just can't stomach the idea that the most explosive story of the year was published by The Rolling Stone.

The Stonewall Inn was a gay nightclub in New York City's Greenwich Village, and on June 28, 1969, the police raided the bar along with the Public Morals Squad. Such events typically occurred every month or so, and the authorities, who were being paid off by the proprietors of the Stonewall, had no anticipation that June 28th would be different from any other raid.

However, it was different. Instead of quietly acquiescing to the police demands to produce identification or to verify physical gender, patrons of the Stonewall refused to cooperate. Tension continued to mount as the police decided to arrest many of the patrons, and violence broke out when a lesbian was hit in the head with a billy club. The riot quickly spread, and subsequent nights brought out additional people.

This spontaneous event marked the beginning of the gay rights movement in this country. These men and women, who only wanted a place where they could be themselves, had simply had enough. Tired of being persecuted for being different, for the first time they stood up and fought for the rights they should have had all along.

I consider myself a friend to the LGBT community. I'm vocal about my opinion that every human, regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation, should have the same rights as their more mainstream brothers and sisters. The institutionalized bigotry exercised by local, state and federal institutions is simply unacceptable, and I make sure my political representatives know that's what I think. I would never consider voting for (or being friends with) someone who believed homosexuality was "unnatural" or believed members of the LGBT community should be considered "lesser" because of who they are. Fuck that. The LGBT community are my friends, my coworkers, my family. I would fight for their rights at least as vociferously as I would fight for my own.

So I'll commemorate the Stonewall riots in Greenwich Village, and pledge to stand up with my brothers and sisters should the occasion arise again.

So Colorado Skepticamp is over for another year. This year's event was advertised as being "lean and mean," as that relieves the organizers of the burden of finding sponsors and such. From a facilities standpoint, I didn't really notice a difference - the event was held at the Duane Physics Building on the University of Colorado Campus, and since lunch was not provided, the location totally worked because there were many restaurant choices within walking distance. So a big thank you to CU for providing the facility for free.

This year I listened to talks by Reed Esau, the founder of Skepticamp on "The Rationale for Open Events in Skepticism;" astrophysicist Stuart Robbins on "Apocalypse 2012: Death by the Mayans, Pole Shifts, or Galactic Alignments;" Alan Eliasen, creator of the really impressive conversion software Frink on "Skepticalculations;" Duff McDuffee, personal development skeptical blogger on "What Happened to the Stars of The Secret?;" author Matt Young on "Why Evolution Works (and Creationism Fails);" Morgan Levy, MD on "Constitutional Sex;" and the Rocky Mountain Paranormal Society on "'Proof' of the Paranormal." There were additional talks, but I had to leave after the RMPS talk, as I had another commitment.

In terms of my favorite talks this year, Stuart Robbins again made the final cut with his humorous and informative talk on the panic and ridiculous claims associated with our upcoming destruction in December of 2012. Using actual science and interesting graphics, Stuart proved that many of the claims made by 2012 doomsayers are just plain wrong. Science FTW!

My other favorite was the always entertaining Bryan and Baxter of the Rocky Mountain Paranormal Society. Their talk was about how the so-called "proof" of the paranormal wasn't really proof at all, and how true scientific inquiry always looks for the natural explanation of events before the supernatural. I thoroughly enjoy their banter, and I'm always impressed by how their investigations are about the people they help, rather than about self-aggrandizement or "proving" their preconceived notions. Good skeptics, and apparently decent human beings, as well. Except for that guy in the middle. He was a little shady.

Of the three Skepticamps I've attended, I still believe last year's event was the best. The choices this year were not as scientifically centered as the offerings last year, and being the science fan-girl that I am, I was a bit disappointed about that. Of course, the organizers have no control over the variety of the talks - this is a 100% volunteer event, and if fewer scientists choose to come and talk about science, that's just the way the event shakes out.

It was still a worthwhile use of my time, and I saw some folks I hadn't seen since last year (Hi Rachael! Hi Reed! Hi Rich!) and met some new people, as well (Hi, Erik! Thanks for the ride!).

I'm actually considering giving a talk next year myownself. Yeah, I know - shocking. I may lose my nerve and pretend I never wrote this, of course, but for right now, I'm CONSIDERING IT.

I'll be scarce around here today, as I'll be in Boulder attending the 2010 Colorado Skepticamp. I go every year, and every year I fail to give a talk. But every year they let me come back because I bring food for the whole group.

The schedule this year looks pretty good, and I'm especially looking forward to Matt Young's talk on "Why Evolution Works (and Creationism Fails)." I'll also being seeing occasional commenter Rachael again, who I met (and had a beer with) last year. I'll be writing my usual fullreport, but probably not until tomorrow - I have other plans for my evening that have everything to do with the Incomparable Anne™ and nothing to do with satisfying you all's prurient curiosity. Have a nice Saturday, Hot Chicks and Smart Men.

The latest casualty is the electric dryer, which, during last week's laundry lost it's ability to generate heat:

6/18: I made an appointment for a service technician to come to our home to repair our electric dryer. The technician, after arriving late, determined the issue and indicated he had to order parts to fix it. He did so, and made an appointment for today to come and install them.

6/23: I received a call from the Sears Home Repair service center asking if the parts had been received. I told the representative that one part had been received, but not the other. He told me he would check on the status, and hung up. I subsequently discovered that the second part had been delivered to our front porch, so I attempted to call the service center back and let them know. After waiting in queue for over five minutes, I hung up.

6:24: I called the service center again. I informed the representative that both parts had indeed been received at our home, and asked to confirm the appointment for today, 6/25/2010 between 8:00 am. and noon, as printed on the receipt given to us by the technician. The representative indicated he did not see an appointment for me on that date, but would schedule one for today at the same time.

Today: I waited for the technician to arrive. When he did not appear by noon, I called the service center to find out the status. The representative told me that the appointment had been cancelled because the parts were not shown to have arrived. Since I had spoken to another representative just the previous day and confirmed the appointment, you can imagine my disappointment that the Sears Home Repair call center had poked the pooch and screwed up the appointment after I had been without a dryer for a week. The best the representative could do was to reschedule my appointment for 6/30/2010.

I asked to speak to a supervisor, and when he got on the phone, he informed me that the customer relationship management software did show my call on the 6/24/2010, but they had no record that the parts had arrived. I asked him do whatever he needed to do in order to get a technician to my home TODAY, since I had informed Sears Home Repair of the status of the parts and received verbal confirmation of the appointment. The best the supervisor could do was reschedule the appointment for 6/30/2010 – the same offer as the representative. I asked him to escalate the issue, and again – the same offer. I’m unsure why the moron in question thought repeated apologies and an absolute refusal to provide customer service constituted an “escalation,” but he also refused to allow me to speak to anyone above him. I suspect some remedial training may be in order for the original, incompetent representative, and the powerless supervisor to whom I was “escalated.”

___________Update: So we had also scheduled the handyman to come out today to do a few things. He was supposed to be here at 1:00 p.m., but called and said he'd be delayed, although he was "definitely" coming out today. Then he called at 3:00 p.m. and said he was still delayed. Then he called at 4:30 p.m. and said the owner would have to call me and reschedule the appointment. "I don't think that word means what you think it means."

At least he had the courtesy to call and keep me informed, and the tasks I had for him aren't critical (unlike the dryer). I just wonder - is it really so hard for people to actually do what they say they're going to do, and perform the work for which they're paid in anything less than a half-ass and perfunctory manner? No wonder there's oil pouring into the gulf - the yahoos in charge of safety probably thought of their job as "customer service."

For many years, I financially supported a charitable organization called "Puppies Behind Bars." Located in New York State, Puppies Behind Bars trains inmates to raise puppies to become service dogs for the disabled and explosive detection canines for law enforcement. The program works because raising puppies to become service dogs takes an enormous amount of time and effort, and if there's one thing inmates have, it's time.

The brainchild of a woman named Gloria Gilbert Stoga, the program was originally designed to raise dogs that were to be trained as Guide Dogs for the Blind. Since its inception, it has expanded to include explosive ordinance disposal training and service dogs for all kinds of disabilities. Their most recent endeavor is called "Dog Tags," and involves providing service dogs to veterans returning home from Iraq and Afghanistan who have suffered a physical injury, traumatic brain injury or exhibit Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

A number of years ago, I stopped donating money to them, because their operating expenses were exceeding what I thought was reasonable. I have limited money to send to charities, and I can't abide the idea that it's being wasted. So I reluctantly took them off my list.

I recently took another look at them, though, and I was DELIGHTED to learn their operating expenses had been reduced to about 15%, which is excellent. I'll be putting them back on my charitable giving schedule today.

I love this program, and not just because it revolves around dogs, although that helps. I love the symmetry of it. Hardened criminals, some of whom have committed pretty heinous crimes. Disabled people, including disabled vets, who need help to regain some independence in their lives. Law enforcement dog handlers, who need reliable and professional companions to help save lives. And the creature who brings them together - eight week old pups, who are destined to change every life they touch. The convicts testify to the healing power of their puppy raising experiences, how it changes their lives, softens their emotions, returns them to a state of community, of compassion, of love. The disabled people testify to the ways in which their companion dogs change every aspect of their lives, giving them independence, safety and companionship. And the law enforcement people talk about how PBB dogs are the best dogs - the best trained, the most ready, the most successful.

These dogs - their very existence and interaction with humanity redeems us. Even the most hardened among us. Service dogs, in the truest sense. Redemption.

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

Last night was the series finale of a television program called Saving Grace, starring Holly Hunter. The program is based on the idea that Grace, an Oklahoma City Police Detective, receives a visit from Earl, a "Last Chance Angel." God wants her back in the fold after a life of drinking, smoking and promiscuous behavior, and has sent the drawling Earl out to the world to accomplish that task.

Given the premise, you may find it strange that a humanist like myself would find such a show endearing, but I found it an interesting study on the nature of good and evil and the power of redemption.

Now I don't believe in an "ultimate" good or an "ultimate" evil. I don't think there are personifications of such things, and I think angels, demons and their respective bosses are figments of humanity's imagination. But "good" and "evil" are certainly defensible concepts within the moral fabric of humanity, and I believe that each of us has a bit of both in us.

I also believe that the historical struggle between the two is really nothing more than a holding action. We're never going to have some Utopian society where no one's ever covetous of their neighbor's goat/mate/natural resources and we all go skipping through the daisies, lalala. Within the context of the wider world, we're never going to have some dystopian hellhole where anarchy reins and the man with the biggest cleaver always wins, although I recognize there are certainly pockets of such villainy in the world.

But here's the thing - the fight matters. Standing up and fighting the good fight, even if you lose, is an aspect of our moral character. It gives humanity as a species something to aspire to. If evil and bad behavior has an entropy of its own, then left to its own devices it will creep across our civilizations like a cancer. Making the commitment to fight stops that creep, even if you lose, by setting the example for others to follow.

It's not always necessary to defeat evil, but it is always necessary to confront it. I thank the writers at Saving Grace for reminding me of that.

I don't really have writerly angst. I'm just profoundly unmotivated today from a blogging perspective, and when I complained about it on Twitter, long time reader and occasional commenter @steve_buchheit suggested I write about how I can't write a post because I have "Writerly Angst." Which made me snicker, seeing as how I'm not exactly an "artiste." More like a member of a sarcastic peanut gallery in the balcony of life.

I guess I just have "angst," for reasons I choose not to go into. As we've noted here before, mental housecleaning is never fun, but often necessary.

So in lieu of coherent and lucid content, here are my angsty and cryptic thoughts for the day:

Worthwhile things require constant and diligent work, and to expect otherwise is unrealistic and sets me up for failure.

Getting hung up on things that irritate but don't pertain to the true value in a person or a relationship is not a virtue. But keeping things in perspective is.

When I was growing up, I was involved in a horse related youth group called "Westernaires." It was a mounted drill group, with various specialty groups. I was a member for over nine years, and spent an enormous percentage of my childhood and teen years with this group.

The experience itself is rather hard to explain to outsiders. Like many volunteer organizations, Westernaires is somewhat incestuous by nature, and yet I spent so much time there it became the backdrop of my life until I left for the Navy. I met and worked with some amazing people during those years, and I also met and worked with some people that probably should have been hit in the face with a shovel. Very much like life, in fact.

And last night was our mini-reunion.

It took me quite a long time to make the decision to attend this event and join the accompanying Facebook page. In the years since I graduated from Westernaires, my life has changed dramatically not once, but several times, and each time I have reinvented myself and molded a new life. Granted, the impetus for many of those changes have been the fallout of my own stupid decisions, but the fact is still that I'm not the same person I was when I was eighteen.* I finally have a life of which I'm proud, and consider myself a success by the measures I consider important.

So you'd think I would be anxious to go and "compare notes" with the individuals with whom I grew up. Instead, my attitude was one of "meh."

The part of my life that was Westernaires is over. I never had any desire to return as a volunteer. I never had any desire to involve the Smart Twins in the organization. My own feelings about my experiences there are extremely complex, and almost entirely ambivalent. I recognize that my experiences there helped to shape my life and who I am, but I've also had over 25 years of additional experiences, some of which were vastly more influential.

But I made the decision to join the group, and attend the reunion. And I'm glad I did.

I was able to reconnect with a couple of people with whom I had profound personal relationships in my youth. I was able to catch up with people I always liked in a casual way, but lost track of. I made arrangements to have lunch with someone who (it turns out) works in my field, and has a similar outlook on life. And I didn't feel compelled to hit anyone in the face with a shovel.

It's true that you can't go back in time, which is a profoundly good thing. But I learned last night that I can enjoy reminiscing about a part of my life that's over. Even if the experience in question wasn't 100% positive, that doesn't mean revisiting it needs to be an occasion for discomfort or bitterness. I've never been very good at acknowledging the past in a way that entirely puts it to bed, and taking this step turned out to be one of personal growth for me.

It seems unlikely that I will establish the kinds of close relationships with these people that we enjoyed in our childhoods or teens. Too much has happened, in all of our lives, to make that kind of "going back" realistic or even necessarily desirable. But integrating the various parts of my own life in a way that gives me a better understanding of who I am and where I came from can't be anything but a good thing.

______________*When I shared these feelings with one of the organizers, her response was, "Who is?" Um, yes. Good point. I recognize that it's not all about me. But since this is my blog, this entry is.

For the last ten days or so, I've been sneezing like crazy. Springtime in Parker - when ragweed is in bloom, and the pollen invades my immune system like the Assyrian hordes.

The last several days have been especially bad, and I couldn't figure out why I was continuing to sneeze uncontrollably when I was keeping the house sealed up and taking a shower after our morning walkies and my time on the Evil Machine of Torture. I'm claiming my denseness is a result of snot-filled sinuses, because it took me far too long to determine that what was going on. Behold, the vector:

Yes, that would be Boogie the Giant Schnauzer, with ragweed pollen all over his head, which he graciously drags into my demesnes on a daily basis.

Like every pooch on the planet, he considers his daily walkies to be the perfect opportunity to stick his face into every piece of stray vegetation on our route. The result, of course, is that his long beard, eyebrows and fuzzy legs become the perfect vector for transporting the bane of my mucus membranes all over the house.

I'm a college student. I attend the University of Denver, where I attend my classes online. Some of the classes I take are fabulous, and some have blown big chunks of monkey vomit. Much like a traditional program, actually.

I don't really need the degree for which I'm matriculating. Unless I'm willing to start "coaching" people, I'm pretty much at the top of my profession, and can't really expect additional promotions or salary increases just because I get some more fancy learning. I attend college because I'm one of those incredibly annoying people who sees value in life-long learning, and needs a more structured environment in order to get the most out of my learning experience. I attend the University of Denver because their online program offered interesting course-ware, and their degree plan (required for my company's tuition assistance program) suited my needs.

Well, today I started watching a Frontline report on for-profit colleges while on the Evil Machine of Torture. The report is on the business model associated with for-profit education, and how it affects the students, the professors and the shareholders. I'm not through watching it yet, but it got me to thinking - always a dangerous turn of events. DU, my own school, is a private university. The tuition is very expensive, and I will be earning my degree entirely on line.

And yet, I admit that I have a certain amount of contempt when it comes to for-profit education. When someone tells me they earned their degree from the University of Phoenix (the unchallenged king of for-profit education), I have a tendency to mentally roll my eyes and wonder why that person couldn't get into a real university.

Since I try to live an examined life, I have to wonder - what makes my educational experience so superior to those who attend Phoenix? Why do I believe my own degree will mean more than that earned by someone who also received their degree from an on-line program, and probably spent as much money per course as me?

Admittedly, the quality of learning is directly proportional to the motivation of the student taking the course, and I think this is even more true in on on-line environment. I tend to get a lot out of my on-line classes because I put a lot into them, and that has everything to do with why I'm a student. So why do I assume that a student at a for-profit school is only interested in getting their degree, rather than in the learning?

Janiece, I suspect thy name is Hypocrisy.

I'm quite sure there are students who attend the University of Phoenix that are there only because they want a degree in order to drive their career forward. But you know what? There are students at DU who are the same way. The only difference is that the DU students chose a private university that lacked the stigma of a for-profit institution. You might argue that the DU students exhibited better judgment in choosing their school, but that's about it in terms of a value judgment.

I'm still on the fence on this, actually. I'm a huge supporter of adult education, and many for-profit schools cater to that demographic. They're filling a need in our society, and I'm happy that people want to be educated and see value in it. And yet...I find the idea of for-profit education somehow repugnant. The act of educating others for the benefit of the shareholder somehow sullies it in my mind. Even if a case can be made that the educational standards in such an institution are not compromised, the fact that the bottom line is about profit rather than standards makes me feel squicky. I think I'll stick with DU...

I like television. I'm not talking about the mindless pablum that passes for network television, with a few notable exceptions - I'm talking about the series or miniseries being produced by the pay channels that have changed the tenor of television forever. Band of Brothers. Oz. Dexter. Six Feet Under. The Sopranos. And what is probably the best television series ever produced, The Wire.

I've always been a big reader, and in the last year or two my consumption has increased significantly due to the inclusion of audio books as an additional media. I'm a bibliophile. So I know I'm committing some egregious sin here by saying that some television shows produced in the last ten years or so have been at least as good as a number of books I've read lately. I like shows where the characters are complex. I don't mind the use of archetypes, but people have many layers, and including characters that have both faults and virtues makes stories more interesting. I think the pay channels such as HBO and Showtime have done a fabulous job of using the freedom of their medium to accomplish this. Because they're serialized rather than stand alone episodes, these shows offer an opportunity for complexity in both plot and character development that has more in common with a full length novel than a movie or traditional television. Pay channels also have the opportunity to produce shows that address scenarios that would not have been considered "appropriate" 60 years ago. This freedom has resulted in an amazingly diverse group of stories to choose from.

This is the golden age of television. Now where's that fourth season of Dexter?

Last night, I was laying in bed struggling with my thrice-damned insomnia, and I was thinking about the Federal Witness Protection Program,* and the types of people who are constitutionally capable of entering it.

I suppose if your life sucks big wienies, entering WitSec might be a blessing. Given the opportunity to start over, I mean really start over, with a complete break from your former life, I expect there might be people out there that would look at such a chance with eagerness. An opportunity that would allow you do so with a clear conscience don't come along very often, I wouldn't think.

But what about those who, through random chance, might be included in this program and have no desire to leave their old life behind? I would think the choice to abandon your entire life - your family, your history, your friends, your profession - would be a devastating one, and in my insomniac state, I was trying to determine under what circumstances I would do so.

The conclusion I came to had everything to do with love. If I was forced into a position where I was offered witness protection due to witnessing some horrific crime, my decision to enter the program would have everything to do with the safety of my family, and nothing to do with my own personal safety. If, by remaining in my current life, the only life I put in danger was my own, I'd take my chances. Abandoning my family, my friends, my life, would not be worth it. But if remaining in my current life put those I loved in danger, then I'd be out of here so fast my own head would swim. I suspect that such a decision would doom me to a very lonely life, with no contact with those who give my life meaning, but it would sure beat putting them in danger for the sake of my own happiness.

Love is a behavior, not an emotion. I love my life, but I love my family and friends more.

*We watch In Plain Sight, which is what motivated this.Yes, I do think about weird shit while I'm laying awake at night. Shut up.

__________One of my friends over on Facebook indicated that if he had to enter the Witness Protection Program, he'd "make them turn me into a fry cook, or a rocket scientist." That made me chuckle (he's an SE, like me). It also got me to thinking - if I had to enter WitSec, what profession would I choose? I think I'd like to go to nursing school.

Every time Sarah Palin describes herself as a "feminist," I cringe. I mean, it literally makes my skin crawl that such a stupid, cynical, opportunistic shitbag has tried to co-opt a term that I have applied to myself for many years. The fact that people would consider that illiterate bonehead a leader just boggles my mind, and if I have to hear her exclaim "Mama grizzlies are feminists and so am I!" one more time, I'm going to take out my own eye with a spork.

And yet, the results of the primaries last week have given me pause. Republican women all over the country won their primaries, and the blogosphere is abuzz with feminists of every stripe laying claim to the label of "feminist" and crowing (or lamenting) about the new diversity in self-identifying as such. Being a liberal, I tend to conflate the values of feminism with the values of liberalism, and this results in a sort of proprietary mindset relating to the idea of being a feminist. The usual canards are in play - if you don't support abortion rights, you're not a feminist, etc., ad naseum.

I think it's time for a mental house cleaning regarding feminism and what it means to be a woman in this country, at least for me.

At its heart, feminism is about equality, opportunity and choice. If I do the same work and perform at the same level as a man, then I should receive equal pay. Period. If there's a job opening for which I'm qualified, both mentally and physically, I should receive the same chance to compete for that job as a man, and gender should not be a contributing factor in who gets the job. I should not be constrained by how my society views my gender (or gender roles) in terms of making choices for my life.

I don't think the first two aspects of feminism are subject to debate. If you don't believe women are entitled to equality and opportunity, then I don't think you can call yourself a feminist. The debate comes around the aspect of choice. Is the fact that your "choice" is diametrically opposed to what I would chose make you less of a feminist? If a woman "chooses" to stay home with her children rather than working outside the home, does that "choice" make her less of a feminist? Isn't the essence of "choice" making decisions of your own, without outside influence, whether than influence is the patriarchy or the matriarchy?

I personally believe that my reproductive freedom is the cornerstone of my ability to be a fully contributing member of society on the terms I choose. And, yes, that does include my right to a safe, legal abortion if I choose that course of action. But what I'm coming to realize is that people of good conscience can disagree about what constitutes an appropriate choice and still consider themselves feminists. I don't think my political views could be more different than Carly Fiorina's. But I don't think she's not a feminist. I just think she's wrong. That's a very different conversation.

So what differentiates someone like Ms. Fiorina from that chock-full-o-nuts Sarah Palin? I think it's a question of sincerity and authenticity. Like her or hate her, I think Ms. Fiorina is an accomplished woman, as is Meg Whitman. They both worked their asses off to springboard their careers to the highest levels. I respect that about them, even if I'd never vote for them.

Palin, on the other hand, did not do the work. Her launch into the public eye had everything to do with opportunism and using those around her (especially her children - there's a real "feminist" move) to feed her sense of entitlement and nothing to do with her abilities and skills (or more to the point, the lack thereof). If the essence of feminism is making your own choices and accepting the responsibility for your own accomplishments and failures, then Carly and Meg are feminists. Sarah is not.

I love the fact that the head of my celebrity seraglio, Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson, not only takes seriously his responsibility to teach people good science, but also how to think critically in a world full of bunk, superstition and nonsense.

With plenty of goofing off periodically sprinkled in. Hey - it may not be exciting to you, but to me it's an almost perfect day. The only thing that would make it better would be if the Smart Man was available to spend it with me. Alas and alack, he had to work today. So it's me and the Boogie Dog, who is quite happy to have his normal servant back in the house. Here he is, enjoying his tasty breakfast.

I believe that vaccines are the single greatest medical breakthrough of the last century. They are singularly responsible for the eradication of smallpox, and have prevented the death of hundreds of millions of people world-wide since they went into widespread use.

I firmly believe that those who believe that autism is caused by immunizations are willfully stupid in their belief system. The evidence - the scientific evidence - is absolutely clear regarding the lack of a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. The recent disgrace of that fucktard Andrew Wakefield, and the constant strategy of "moving the goalpost" by the anti-vax movement makes me sick to my stomach. It makes me sick because it results in avoidable sickness and even death in those who count on the adults in their communities to make informed and defensible decisions surrounding public health. As adults, we have an obligation to EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE, and make our decisions based on reality rather than wishful thinking or a desire to "find someone to blame" for our troubles.

I absolutely believe that people who choose not to vaccinate their children because "diphtheria hasn't been prevalent in the United States so I shouldn't have to immunize my child" are criminally stupid. Apparently these yahoos have no idea that people who may be asymptomatic may travel to the United States and actually infect their children. Which, because of their fuckwitted ignorance surrounding "herd immunity and their own complete lack of obligation to their community, will subsequently spread COMPLETELY PREVENTABLE DISEASE through the population like wildfire.

Public health matters. Providing herd immunity through vaccination thresholds protects all members of the community, and I believe informed, educated people should be maintaining their children's immunizations as well as their own. The reason I believe that is because I think we ALL have an obligation to manage preventable disease, and that includes administering vaccinations to our children for the good of the group.

I watched a Frontline special on vaccination the other day while on the Evil Machine of Torture. In it, parents explained their desire to "protect their children" from the risk associated with vaccines. These parents made it pretty damn clear that they thought it was perfectly okay for their kids to skip the risk associated with getting vaccinations, but they were also perfectly happy with their kids enjoying the herd immunity associated with living in a 1st World community. I'm not talking about kids who cannot be immunized due to immune deficiencies and such - I'm talking about people who choose not to expose their children to the risks of immunization, even though they're perfectly healthy. I cannot tell you how reprehensible I find this attitude. It's okay for me to expose MY kids to the (albeit small) risk of vaccination for the good of public health, but it's not okay for YOU to do so, provided you get the benefit?

You can fuck right off with that attitude. Right after I punch you in the throat.

And yet...and yet.

Tax-and-spend liberal that I am, I still place enormous value on self-determination. I believe people should have the right to make their own decisions regarding their health care (or lack of it), and a civilized society should not be permitted to force people to accept health decisions made by the state.

So it appears that in spite of my small "L" libertarian, self-deterministic leanings, I do believe in mandatory vaccination for children, even when their parents don't agree with that decision. Our public health depends on it, and I'd rather abrogate the rights of parents on this issue (with adequate safety precautions) than see a resurgence of polio. Hard decision, to be sure, but it sure beats the alternative.

Last week, I finished the most interesting book -The Secret Life of the Grown-Up Brain,by Barbara Strauch. It's a popular examination of what happens to our brains as we age - the good, the bad and the ugly.

I was surprised to learn that while the Mad Cow keeps me from remembering the names of people I know (or know of), the companion aspect of my aging brain is that I'm apparently smarter, happier and more creative.* Do I think as fast, or learn as fast as I used to? No. Is my short-term memory comparable? Hell, no. But now that the increased skills have been brought to my attention, I'm finding that it really is true - once I DO learn something, I'm able to use that knowledge in a more creative way, applying it in unexpected ways that would not have occurred to me when I was young and considered myself the smartest kid on the block. Since the ability to apply my learning in a more diverse way is a gift from my middle-aged brain, I guess I can't complain TOO much about my chronic inability to remember things on a short term basis. Of course, I'll forget about that rationalization within the hour and complain anyway, so there you go.

Ms. Strauch also talked about things people can do to enhance our brain's performance over the long haul. I was already aware of most of them - education, aerobic exercise, maintaining an active intellectual life - and I think I'm pretty good about ensuring I take pretty good care of my noggin.

I admit I'm a bit OCD about this issue - the thought of "losing my mind" is, quite frankly, the scariest, most horrifying health outcome I can imagine. I'd rather suffer through anything - ANYTHING - than suffer from dementia. So this book gave me some hope. If you're over 40, and concerned about your mental faculties, I'd recommend this book as an avenue to continued intellectual and mental health.

If you can remember the title, that is.

______________*There's no doubt in my bovine spongiform encphalopahy riddled mind that my Hot Mom is currently reading this from Northern Colorado and just laughing and laughing. Because, of course, she's known this to be true for years. It's funny how your parents get smarter and smarter as you get older and older, isn't it?

I feel like dancing in the streets. Dancing, I say. Naked. With confetti made from abstinence only sex education pamphlets raining down upon my head.

Okay, maybe I'll spare you (and the neighbors) the naked part.

But guess what? The Obama Administration, through the Office for Public Health and Science, has announced their funding plan for Teenage Pregnancy Prevention. The key part of the announcement is the majority of funding will be going to replicate Evidence Based Programs. That's right - if your program works, then you'll be getting funding from the federal government. If you're program doesn't work, then you be getting an invitation to fuck right off.

Here's the part that has me dancing in the streets:

Under this announcement, a total of $75,000,000 is available on a competitive basis for the purpose of replicating evidence-based programs that have been proven through rigorous evaluation to reduce teenage pregnancy, behavioral risks underlying teenage pregnancy, or other associated risk factors. Funding is available for two broad program types: 1) curriculum-based programs that seek to educate young people about topics such as responsible behavior, relationships, and pregnancy prevention and 2) youth development programs that seek to reduce teenage pregnancy and a variety of risky behaviors through a broad range of approaches.

You get that? It doesn't require that specific ideology be taught. It doesn't require that the word "abstinence" be used (or stricken) from the curriculum. It simply requires that programs that request funding must "have been proven through rigorous evaluation to reduce pregnancy, behavioral risks underlying teenage pregnancy, or other associated risk factors." You want funding for your abstinence only sex education program? No problem. Simply prove that it ACTUALLY WORKS. and the federal government will consider your request. You want funding for your let-it-all-hang-out-leave-no-testicle-unturned sex education program? No problem. Simply prove that it ACTUALLY WORKS.

I love that the OPHS has announced that funding for programs meant to prevent teen pregnancy must be proven to actually work before they get the money. Using the evidence based approach helps to limit ideological bias in the process, and - BEST OF ALL - may actually help young men and women make better choices when it comes to love, sex and reproduction.

So. After trying to get someone from the plumbing office to call us back and come fix our toilet, I finally made an appointment with our Handyman Service. They were supposed to come Saturday and fix the toilet. So we made sure there was someone home ALL DAY, and we waited and waited.

Along about 3:00 p.m., I called them, wanting to know when they would get here. "Oh," the owner said. "My guy called when he was ready, no one answered, so he knocked off for the day after leaving a message."

You know, I'm not sure who received his message, but our home phone did not ring on Saturday. The handyman did leave a message on my cell (which I had instructed them only to call if no one answered the home number), but that didn't help me much - the toilet was still broken, and anyone who's ever tried to get in touch with me knows that my cell should be your last choice.

I kind of felt sorry for the owner. After being a shit-magnet for crappy customer service for basically a month, I'm afraid I'd had it, and I was a bit...abrupt. Bless his heart, he didn't tell me to get bent, but instead said he'd come Sunday morning at 9:00 a.m. to rebuild the toilet himself. Which he did, so now we have a toilet that actually works on the main floor. I'm happy about that, of course, but I have to say - I'm really, really tired of dealing with service (or "non-service," as the case may be) people. Really, really tired. And I'm tired of being mad about it, too. Because I work from home (and the Smart Man doesn't), such chores naturally fall to me, and while I have a full intellectual understanding about why the situation is the way it is, emotionally I still sometimes feel like I'm being taken advantage of.

Yes, I know it's ridiculous. No, that doesn't have any bearing on the way I feel, especially after having people trot in and out of my house like it's Grand Central Station Terminal* for the last several weeks.

So this week, instead of dealing with service people, I get to drive from Parker to Westminster every day to take part in a special project for my company. Another completely reasonable request, but the fact of the matter is that driving in traffic gives me almost as much stress as dealing with non-service people. So I'm afraid my week isn't going to get any better.

Have you had enough of my bitching, yet? I know I have.

The bright side? The Smart Man got me a gift certificate for a massage to help me get my stress under control. Because that's just the way he rolls.

You know, I thought I was turning a corner on this whole "poor customer service" thing. The fabulous Abba Floors and Junz were restoring my faith, and I was prepared to go about the business of keeping my house in good repair with a smile on my face and song in my heart.

Yeah. Silly rabbit.

We have a plumber that we use - Crown Plumbing. We've used them several times over the last several years, and been satisfied with the results. In fact, I've spent over $1,300.00 with them just in the last month, thanks to the water heater giving up the ghost and a leaky toilet. So when I called them to come and look at the downstairs toilet, which is apparently running a marathon, I expected to have the issue resolved by today at the latest.

Yeah. Silly rabbit.

Do you think I could get them to actually CALL ME BACK? No. No, I couldn't. In fact, I called them a SECOND TIME and left a message expressing my disappointment with their lack of responsiveness. I explained that after spending so much money with Crown Plumbing in the last month, it kind of sucked that their behavior indicated a level of unresponsiveness that implied they really didn’t care much about establishing relationships with repeat customers.

They STILL didn't call me back.

It must be nice to have a business that's so all-fired successful that you can afford to blow off repeat customers when they call to engage your services and are willing to pay you for the same. I know a number of small business owners*, and none of them feel that way about their business.

I've written my normal consumer complaint letter, but considering they can't even be bothered to return a call for a revenue generating opportunity, I doubt they'll give a shit about a letter explaining why we'll no longer patronize their company. Instead I'll be giving my money to our Handyman Service, Incepector Handyman. Because not only do they do good work, they actually RETURN MY CALLS.

__________________*One such business, The Underground Sprinkler Corps, has been maintaining our sprinkler system for the entire time we've lived here. In fact, the owner just left after replacing a defective sprinkler head. He and his family have always been professional, responsive, fair, and done good work. Which is why they get our business, year after year, in addition to my permission to dig up some of my yellow irises.

The other morning the Boogie-Dog and I were on our normal morning walk. I took my camera, as the wildflowers are starting to bloom in the field where we walk, and I wanted to take some pictures.

That extended our walk a bit, and while I was dinking around, Boogie found a ball. Which he carried around for the next 20 minutes.

After I was done with my camera, I looked around for Boogie so we could go home and have some breakfast, and found him relaxing in the tall grass. All I could see were his little pointed ears, peeping above the grass-line, and as I approached, he dropped his new found toy in the hopes that I would pick it up and throw it for him. Which, of course, I did.

I consider myself an "American." Not an Irish-American, or a European-American, or a White-American. I'm American (but not in an "America - Fuck, Yeah!" kind of way). There is no doubt where my first loyalty lies, and I trust that while my behavior reflects that loyalty, I'm not a nationalistic nutbag with no sense of proportion or clarity about my own government.

As an American citizen, I feel that I have a obligation to make decisions and form opinions about political issues based on two factors: First, what is right, in an ethical sense. Secondarily, what is best, for the majority of people who live in this country. That seems simple, but we all know it's not - it's very easy to give in to fear, or regionalism, or split loyalties. Which brings me to a topic that I've been thinking about a lot lately, but I've been somewhat loathe to write about - tribalism.

I'm beginning to think tribalism really isn't good for America. Not good at all.

Please note I'm not talking about diversity, or multiculturalism. Ensuring people have the opportunity to maintain their cultural identity is not the same as focusing exclusively on the well-being of your own group to the exclusion of everyone else in the body politic.

It seems to me that people who indulge in tribalism make decisions and form opinions about political issues not based on what is right and what is best for the majority, but exclusively on what is best for their tribe. If a program is good for their tribe but bad for the majority, in their mind, it's the right thing to do, regardless of whether or not it's right. If it's bad for their tribe, regardless of other considerations, it's simply bad.

Is tribalism a sort of a cancer on the body politic? If members of a tribe exercise their franchise for the good only of the tribe, rather than the whole, then how long will it be until the whole suffers irreparable damage? I can't answer that - I don't think anyone can, but I'm pretty sure such behavior can't be good for the whole.

It goes both ways, of course. When Arizona passed its draconian law regarding the demand for proof of legal residence, I opposed it. I opposed it because it was wrong, not because I'm Hispanic, or have Hispanic relatives. The first criteria for me was whether or not the law is ethical, not whether or not it was good for my tribe.* As a citizen, I have an obligation do what's right, and I think sometimes tribalism blurs that line in the mind of those who indulge in it.

Many years ago, I read a novel by a Jewish author. One of his primary points was that Jews were fundamentally barbarians, because as a group, their first concern has always been, "What's best for the Jews?" I think that stereotype may have a grain of truth for a variety of historical reasons, but I'd hesitate to apply it to every Jew on the planet. I will posit, however, that groups who indulge in tribalism may be accurately described as barbarians, for their failure to look outside their group and take the larger world into account.

__________________*It's not good for my tribe. I'm just using it as an example.

It seems like here lately that I've been inundated with "Adventures in Customer Service." Some have been positive, but most have been negative. Coupled with my worse-than-usual insomnia, it was really just starting to piss me the hell off.

But what I've realized, just this morning, is that there are companies out there that value customer service. There are probably more that don't, but I'm glad to have a few positive experiences to offset the negative.

Consider:

Last week, we had new floors installed in our kitchen and bathrooms. We're really pleased with the way they turned out, and our experience with the installers was so AWESOME I just have to share it.

We bought the project from Empire Today, as they had the material we were interested in. The sales person was competent, although their sales tactics made me roll my eyes a little - I'm in sales myownself, buddy. I know that your sales funnel will not be irreversibly compromised if we install this project on Wednesday instead of Tuesday when it's the middle of the month. You're not fooling anyone with your artificial metrics.

However, the installers that Empire subcontracted with - they were the cat's pajamas. They're a little company named "Abba Floors," and Andre and Lucas, the family team that came out to do our project were made of Awesome. With Awesome Sauce. They were communicative, courteous, on-time, friendly, and (most important) liked my dog. Noting that I'm a complete ignoramus when it comes to things like home improvement projects and floor installation techniques, they still treated me with respect, and explained everything about the project ahead of time. And here's the kicker: After they were done, and I had accepted and signed off on the project, the Smart Man came home and noticed a tiny piece of quarter round in the kitchen that was the wrong color. I called them the next day, explained what happened, and since they were under no obligation to come back after I accepted the job, I offered to pay them a trip charge to come back out and fix the issue. Well, they were out within four hours, and fixed the issue with no trouble - and would not accept a trip charge. They made it clear to me that customer service is vitally important to them, and it showed.

They do not have a website, so if anyone in the Denver area needs some labor for flooring, send me a note and I'll send their contact information along.

And:

When the fabulous Jeri was here a couple of weeks ago, the Smart Man, me, Stacey, JR and the Incomparable Anne™ went to our very first favorite Japanese sushi restaurant here in Parker, Junz.We've been going to Junz for years and years, and it's really our favorite restaurant in our part of town. So imagine our surprise when the service was inattentive and sloppy, and the sushi ordered by half of our party took over an hour to prepare, while other patrons who arrived after us received their sushi before us.

Well.

I realize I have no personal relationship with these people. It's not like we hang out. But we do have a professional relationship. Junz has been our "go-to" restaurant for date-night, special occasions and sushi with friends. We've never had a bad meal there, and never had poor service. So I felt a little betrayed by their behavior, and ended up feeling like I needed to apologize to my friends for the poor service they received.

Not being one to suffer in silence, I wrote a letter to the executive chef, explaining my concerns and describing our experience. And lo and behold, the manager called less than a week later, explaining that they had called a meeting immediately upon receiving my letter to determine what happened, and to come up with a plan to ensure it wouldn't happen again. He ended up expressing his hope that we would give them another chance, as they didn't want to lose a loyal customer.

I can't tell you how happy I was that they responded to my note - I really love that restaurant, and I didn't want to drop them like a hot rock for letting their customer service go to shit.

So in spite of feeling a bit put upon in regards to poor customer service in the last month, there actually are companies out there that care about how they treat their customers, and aren't afraid to share that feeling. Unfortunately, I think they may be in the minority. Which means when I do find a company that feels that way, I'll be holding on like grim death.

About Me

I am a Hot Chick living in Castle Rock, CO with my fabulous family. We have a rescue dog named "Jackson," and she's a Basenji/Shepherd mix. She's something of a head case, but we love her. I'm a U.S. Navy vet, and I currently work as an Enterprise Solutions Architect, specializing in VoIP and multimedia contact center design. I care about social justice, libraries, science, the U.S. Constitution and the military. I'm a tax and spend liberal in a largely red county, but I try not to be stabby about it. I have a little resale side business called "Alastrina Enterprises." Stupidity, cupidity and wanton assholery piss me off, and I'm more than a little soft when it comes to dogs and those who serve others. I blog about whatever I feel like. I use foul language, so if that sort of thing offends you, feel free to fuck off now - if I'm unwilling to clean up my language for my fabulous Great Auntie Margie, I'm unlikely to do so for you. Newcomers are welcome here, especially those who disagree with me, but trolling and spamming will be met with the Shovel of Doom™.